Robert Wolff 1970
Some definitions…
The state is a group of persons who have and exercise supreme authority within a given territory. p3
Power is the ability to compel compliance. p4
Authority is the right to command and correlatively, the right to be obeyed. p4
Authority is de facto just in case it is acknowledged it exists. p5
Authority is de jure when there is a legitimate source to the obligation to obey. p9
Obedience is not a matter of doing what someone tells you to do. It is a matter of doing what he tells you to do because he tells you to do it. p9
There might be many good reasons to obey the edicts of the state - the command to act could coincide with one's desire to act in that matter or the command could have independently moral obligation to act - but a state only has du jury authority if you ought follow its edicts merely because it issued them.
The fundamental assumption of moral philosophy is that men are responsible for their actions. p12
Taking responsibility involves attempting to determine what one ought to do. p12
Only because man has the capacity to reason about his choices can he be said to stand under a continuing obligation to take responsibility for them. p12
A responsible individual is not someone who always does what is right but rather is someone who doesn't neglect the duty of attempting to ascertain what is right. p 13
Moral autonomy is a combination of freedom and responsibility; it is a submission of laws which one has made for oneself. p14
In as much as moral autonomy is simple the condition of taking full responsibility for one's actions, it follows that men can forfeit their autonomy at will. Yet man can never give up responsibility for his actions. p14
For the autonomous man, there is no such thing as a command. Compliance with a command is purely occasional with the assessment of the moral character of of it. p15
The moral condition demands that we acknowledge responsibility and achieve autonomy wherever and whenever possible. p17
The defining mark of the state is authority, the right to rule.
The primary obligation of man is autonomy, the refusal to be ruled.
If all men have a continuing obligation to achieve the highest degree of autonomy possible, then there would appear to be no state whose subjects have a moral obligation to obey its commands. p18-19
The classic solution offers democracy as a freedom maximiser for all:
Men cannot be free so long as they are subject to the will of others. But if men rule themselves, if they are both law-givers and law-obeyers, then they can combine the benefits of government with the blessings of others. p21-22
Unanimous direct democracy offers a solution to the conflict between autonomy and authority but its actualisation requires the imposition of impossibly restrictive conditions. p22
But, unanimous direct democracy offers an ideal which can underpin the moral claims of classical democratic theory. p27
Representational democracy can overcome some of the logistical challenges to UDD. p28
It can be distinguished as ranging from mere delegation of voting rights (proxy voting) to complete turnover of all decision making authority. p28
What obligation do I have to laws made by a representative who has no obligation to act with concern to me or in my interest? p29
RD is no different than a dictatorship with kindly intent p30
So long as I do not join in the enactment of the laws by which I am governed, I cannot justly claim to be autonomous. p30
Men cannot meaningfully be called free if their representatives vote independently of their wishes, ow when laws are passed concerning issues which they are not able to understand. Nor can me be called free who are subject to secret decisions, based on secret data, having unannounced consequences for their well being and their lives. p31
RD can't claim it is the expression or will of the unless the people are given the genuine opportunity to vote for candidates who represent their points of view. p32
If the individual retains his autonomy by reserving to himself in each instance the final decision whether to cooperate, he thereby denies the authority of the state. If on the other hand, he submits to the state and accepts its claim to authority, the so far as any of the beneficial consequences arguments] indicate, he loses his autonomy. p40
Bounding oneself to laws which one does not will, and indeed even vigorously oppose, is no more than voluntary slavery. p43
@book{wolff1970defense, title={In defense of anarchism}, author={Wolff, R.P.}, year={1970}, publisher={Univ of California Pr} }